To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

Canadian Gaming News, Issue 90 (2002, March)

Canadian Gaming News, Issue 90 (2002, March) - Page 1

Canadian GamingNews,
How should Windsor
read Detroit?
March could be a big month for the
City of Detroit's three casino operators
and, because it is an important player
in this market, for Casino Windsor.
There are two reasons for this:
The first is that the agreements which
the three operators have with the City
of Detroit expire March 31. New
agreements will have to be signed and,
distinct from their operating agree-ments
with the Michigan Gaming
Commission, these agreements will
say what the permanent casinos which
each operator is committed to build,
will look like. Will their gaming floors
expand, will they add retail, conference
centres, hotels, and so on.
Given the importance of these new
agreements, there are frantic discus-sions
underway between the operators
and Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick who
must pull the deals together; between
Kilpatrick and the city councilors who
must approve them; between the coun-cilors
and their electorates, and
amongst lobbyists, special interests,
fundraisers, the media, and everyone
else who thinks they have an interest,
as to what the city's new agreements
with the operators should require of
them.
For a Canadian parallel, re- read our
September 200 1 article on Ralph Fiske
and the behind the scenes battle over
whether the operator at Casino Hali-fa^
would be forced to build a casino it
did not want.
The Detroit operators originally
promised huge, expensive palaces
which are light years from the
' temporary', non- descript premises
two of the three now occupy. While
Greektown Casino ranks as an at-tractive
property, the gaming floor at
Motor City Casino resembles that
of Las Vegas' Imperial Palace only
with lower ceilings, columns, and
multiple gaming areas. Outside, it is
a square box with cars having to
follow a circuitous route to get to its
main entrance - and then scramble to
find parking.
This is not to detract from the efforts
of the three. As with Windsor's
temporary casino, Casino de Mon-trkal,
and the Brantford Charity
Casino, one has to work with what
one is given when opening casinos in
buildings designed for other uses.
We hear that while Motor City and
Greektown want to add some bells
and whistles - hotels, retail, and con-ference
facilities, and enlarge their
75,000, sq. ft gaming floors, they
want to stay where they are.
MGM wants to move to a larger,
waterfront site. The city first agreed
and used casino backed bonds to
purchase the land. Then it changed
its mind and is now carrying costs on
an expensive piece of land it has no
use for. This has prompted some to
suggest it may still reverse itself and
permit MGM to build there.
The remaining two casinos, in addi-tion
to lobbying to stay where they
are, are also thought to be pushing
to keg, MGM where it is and to limit
its impact as a competitor.
A second reason March is important
is that, overlaying these negotiations
is a recent court decision which
threatens the gaming licenses of
Greektown and Motor City.
Ivan Sack
In 1997 the Lac Vieux Desert Band,
a 430- person band which owns a small
casino in northern Michigan filed a
court challenge against the City of
Detroit. The Lac Vieux spend an
estimated $ 300,000 a year on legal
challenges in Michigan and other
states. They claim that Detroit's refer-endum
question favoured Greektown
and Motor City's operators and dis-criminated
against them because it de-nied
them the right to bid on these
properties.
While a lower court disagreed, the 6th
U. S. Court of Appeals, a federal court
one level below the U. S. Supreme
Court, heard their appeal and, on Jan-uary
11, ruled that the city had
favoured the two operators. The Ap-peal
Court then returned the case to the
lower court judge, the one who had
decided against the band, and told him
to receive statements and decide upon
corrective action. The judge took
statements on February 22 though has
not set a date for his decision.
In their submission, the Lac Vieux
asked that the licenses of the two oper-ators
be revoked and that the state take
over operation of the Detroit casinos
until their licenses can be rebid. Al-ternatively,
they have proposed that
they receive 2% of the profits from
each of the two casinos. This is
thought to be Lac Vieux's way of
saying they are open to a negotiated
settlement. The casinos chose not to

The University of Lethbridge Library received permission from Ivan Sack to digitize and display this content.

Full-Text

Canadian GamingNews,
How should Windsor
read Detroit?
March could be a big month for the
City of Detroit's three casino operators
and, because it is an important player
in this market, for Casino Windsor.
There are two reasons for this:
The first is that the agreements which
the three operators have with the City
of Detroit expire March 31. New
agreements will have to be signed and,
distinct from their operating agree-ments
with the Michigan Gaming
Commission, these agreements will
say what the permanent casinos which
each operator is committed to build,
will look like. Will their gaming floors
expand, will they add retail, conference
centres, hotels, and so on.
Given the importance of these new
agreements, there are frantic discus-sions
underway between the operators
and Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick who
must pull the deals together; between
Kilpatrick and the city councilors who
must approve them; between the coun-cilors
and their electorates, and
amongst lobbyists, special interests,
fundraisers, the media, and everyone
else who thinks they have an interest,
as to what the city's new agreements
with the operators should require of
them.
For a Canadian parallel, re- read our
September 200 1 article on Ralph Fiske
and the behind the scenes battle over
whether the operator at Casino Hali-fa^
would be forced to build a casino it
did not want.
The Detroit operators originally
promised huge, expensive palaces
which are light years from the
' temporary', non- descript premises
two of the three now occupy. While
Greektown Casino ranks as an at-tractive
property, the gaming floor at
Motor City Casino resembles that
of Las Vegas' Imperial Palace only
with lower ceilings, columns, and
multiple gaming areas. Outside, it is
a square box with cars having to
follow a circuitous route to get to its
main entrance - and then scramble to
find parking.
This is not to detract from the efforts
of the three. As with Windsor's
temporary casino, Casino de Mon-trkal,
and the Brantford Charity
Casino, one has to work with what
one is given when opening casinos in
buildings designed for other uses.
We hear that while Motor City and
Greektown want to add some bells
and whistles - hotels, retail, and con-ference
facilities, and enlarge their
75,000, sq. ft gaming floors, they
want to stay where they are.
MGM wants to move to a larger,
waterfront site. The city first agreed
and used casino backed bonds to
purchase the land. Then it changed
its mind and is now carrying costs on
an expensive piece of land it has no
use for. This has prompted some to
suggest it may still reverse itself and
permit MGM to build there.
The remaining two casinos, in addi-tion
to lobbying to stay where they
are, are also thought to be pushing
to keg, MGM where it is and to limit
its impact as a competitor.
A second reason March is important
is that, overlaying these negotiations
is a recent court decision which
threatens the gaming licenses of
Greektown and Motor City.
Ivan Sack
In 1997 the Lac Vieux Desert Band,
a 430- person band which owns a small
casino in northern Michigan filed a
court challenge against the City of
Detroit. The Lac Vieux spend an
estimated $ 300,000 a year on legal
challenges in Michigan and other
states. They claim that Detroit's refer-endum
question favoured Greektown
and Motor City's operators and dis-criminated
against them because it de-nied
them the right to bid on these
properties.
While a lower court disagreed, the 6th
U. S. Court of Appeals, a federal court
one level below the U. S. Supreme
Court, heard their appeal and, on Jan-uary
11, ruled that the city had
favoured the two operators. The Ap-peal
Court then returned the case to the
lower court judge, the one who had
decided against the band, and told him
to receive statements and decide upon
corrective action. The judge took
statements on February 22 though has
not set a date for his decision.
In their submission, the Lac Vieux
asked that the licenses of the two oper-ators
be revoked and that the state take
over operation of the Detroit casinos
until their licenses can be rebid. Al-ternatively,
they have proposed that
they receive 2% of the profits from
each of the two casinos. This is
thought to be Lac Vieux's way of
saying they are open to a negotiated
settlement. The casinos chose not to